Interesting - the Sigma is of course cheaper too...

I just find myself thinking that this could be a one-off chance to bag a DA* lens for not a lot more than the Sigma or Tamron. Given the only recent lenses in my collection are the DA-L 18-55mm, DA 35mm f2.4 and Samyang 85mm f1.4 you can see why I'd be interested in something from the * range!

I'm mostly interested in rallying and 4x4 events, where you can get surprisingly close to the action providing you're sensible. f2.8 is essential though to give AF a chance to lock on when in dark forested areas.

I've already got the old Pentax-F 100-300mm, I fancy upgrading to a constant aperture lens now.

SDM doesn't really worry me too much as the reports I read all seemed to be from quite a while ago, leading me to suspect that Pentax have sorted it out since then. I'll be buying from SRS anyway (when they respond to my email enquiring whether the lenses are in stock), so there will be an extended warranty due to their being a Pro Centre. If it survives the first two years it's likely to carry on forever!

Just wondering what other people would choose from these two. I was all set to buy the Sigma (or Tamron) then noticed that for £40 more I could have the Pentax.

Obviously a DA* with weather sealing appeals and I know this lens has a superb reputation, but I'm not sure whether 135mm would be a bit short given I want it for motorsport photography amongst other things? I have used my 120mm f2.8 quite extensively which suggests that I'd get plenty of use from a newer AF lens with the same aperture.

I always find online stores which require you to register before you can buy anything annoying. It's just another unnecessary security risk IMO - they usually hold name/address/email which could allow all sorts of mischief in the event of their server being compromised.

I'm talking about retailers from whom I might order one or two things in a year. I really don't mind having to type my name and address in every time rather than trying to come up with a memorable but hard-to-guess password and username which hasn't already been taken, then trying to remember what I used when I want to place another order six months later!

For tripods, have a look on ebay for a used Slik 450G or 500G. You can usually pick them up for very little money and they're light, stable tripods.

If you want something heavier duty then look at the Red Snapper range, my recommendation is the three section aluminium legs and ballhead combination which is strong enough to handle Bronica medium format gear and barely notices the K-m. It's not that heavy or bulky though - I carried mine for about four miles recently and never felt overloaded.

I've been paid!

Well, according to my employer anyway. When the bank catch up and realise I've just had money transferred in I can go after that new lens. Change of plan there - after a rather abrupt "we are awaiting stock" response from Carmarthen Cameras I'm going to see if SRS still have any of the older Sigmas in stock.

Note to retailers: abrupt three line emails lose you sales!

I would wonder if the 100mm came out so well because of all those cheap ones which popped up in PC World/Comet/etc a while ago? I bet many people who wouldn't have otherwise bought a macro lens were tempted and found the lens absolutely incredible for the money!

Hmm, I only own two of them!

I'm intrigued by the fact that an original K series lens just made it into the top twenty. I can see why though - I've got the 28/3.5 and it is absolutely amazing. It doesn't see any use on digital now as I have the DA 35/2.4 but it'll be on my KX for Goodwood FoS the weekend after next. Planning to shoot the static exhibits on colour slide film and the track displays on digital (hopefully with a new Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 ), that'll avoid the need to change lenses and also give a wonderfully intuitive old camera a chance to show that it can still keep up with the latest gadgets!

Agreed. The only time I've ever managed to get an SMC lens to flare was when shooting IR with a cheap filter. I think the filter caused it rather than the lens, as I've never had it before or since!

Only snag then is that the more clueless reviewers (like the one who thought the chrome trim on the K-m was more important than the images it can produce) will whine that it doesn't have a zoom lens!

I do think Pentax should offer both as kits. Go back to boxing bodies and lenses separately and make it a no-extra-cost option to have the 35/2.4 instead of the 18-55mm should you wish.